Nearly three-quarters of Americans strongly disagree with Sen. John McCain’s demand to delay the presidential debates in order to focus on the current economic crisis, says an MSNBC online poll. The debates are set to start tonight at the University of Mississippi.

 

Additionally, the Associated Press-Knowledge Networks poll released this morning, just prior to McCain’s announcement that he will indeed participate, shows that 60 percent of Americans wanted the debates to move forward, versus less than a quarter (22 percent) who backed McCain’s initial decision. The rest of the poll respondents were undecided.

 

What message did McCain communicate to the American public by requesting the delay? “It depends on who you ask. People who are strongly in favor of McCain will say that it shows leadership and courage, people in the Obama camp will say that it is a ploy,” says consultant, speaker and author Simma Lieberman (www.simmalieberman.com).

 

“I think that most people who are independents would be unhappy because they want to know where these candidates stand on these crucial issues,” Lieberman adds. “It can be seen as not respecting the voters who view the debates as very important to this process, and who look to the candidates for leadership and clarification.”

 

Overall, Lieberman says, the message was not positive. “The general sentiment from media—and media impacts election culture—is that the action of McCain is high theater and a way to get back in the headlines,” she says.

 

Communication expert Leslie G. Ungar, president of OH-based Electric Impulse Communications, Inc. (www.electricimpulse.com) agrees. “The problem with going out on a limb, is that sometimes it breaks! McCain went out on this self-imposed limb, and now has to figure out how to come back while looking empowered. It was a risk, and I can't see an upside,” she tells demo dirt.

 

The reason? “A Democratic society is based on free speech. It is a part of our American fabric. And with free speech comes an obligation to dialogue. McCain did not just unilaterally decide to withdraw from an event. He withdrew from a basic American institution,” she explains.

 

Lieberman says that McCain’s request implied that he is not taking the political process seriously. “When John McCain says ‘suspend the election,’ and put politics aside, it can be seen as inferring that this election is not serious, but is a game and that we can take a ‘time-out’ anytime—like in baseball—and agree on everything,” she says.

 

The debates are far more important to the American people than some media figures will admit, says Ungar. Obviously, the poll statistics indicate that they indeed mean a lot to voters. “Conservative political pundits claim no one but the media cares if there is a debate. I disagree. Americans are smart enough; listen at the water cooler, listen in line for your morning coffee,” Ungar argues. “Americans want to hear what these candidates have to say. One of them will inherit this mess. Americans have a right to know what each candidate thinks and how they speak, how they look, as they communicate their way through this mess.”

 

Ungar says the move provokes some questions that the American public should ask itself. “McCain's non-suspension suspension of his campaign, while going on Katie Couric's news show, is an interesting study in decision-making,” she says. “His surrogates are still on the TV trail. Where is the suspension from a communication perspective? Can you decide if someone else's event should go on? McCain's temperament and decision-making continue to come under question. Does he create a crisis just to solve it? Does he make hasty decisions?”

 

And what did Obama's response to go ahead—and his comment that "a president should be able to do more than one thing at once"—communicate to Americans? Was it a shot at McCain? Or a legitimate reaction?

 

“Obama was communicating that he is in command, and understands that you have to have faith in at least some of the people who have been elected in your own party to do their job,” Lieberman says. “It also communicates being a leader who knows when he needs to be present and can make an impact and when he is not crucial to the conversation.”

 

Obama wasn’t communicating an insult when he said that presidents need to be able to multitask, Ungar contends. “How many countries and continents have military, financial, and government problems? Do more than one thing at once? How about 25 things at once?” she maintains.

 

“A president does need to do more than one thing at a time, and it also communicates that Obama will know how to delegate and have people around him who are very smart and capable,” Lieberman adds.

 

Lieberman says that Obama’s reaction could also highlight another candidate's shortcomings. “I won't say that it was a shot at McCain although it certainly would be seen as a good fit, and also communicates the lack of competence of Palin, who has not been called on at all to take on any role,” she says.

 

Overall, both communication experts say that Obama’s reaction was consistent with the traits required of a good leader.

 

“Obama seized the opportunity to be presidential. He responded quickly that he would continue to participate in the debate, and that the American public deserved to hear this issue debated,” Ungar says. “He spoke with clarity and consistency. Those attributes have great value in today's world. Watch for the candidate who speaks with clarity, conviction, and confidence.”